d: (DEFGENERIC IF (X)) should signal a PROGRAM-ERROR, but instead
causes a COMPILER-ERROR.
-48:
- SYMBOL-MACROLET bugs reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
- c: SYMBOL-MACROLET should signal PROGRAM-ERROR if something
- it binds is declared SPECIAL inside.
-
51:
miscellaneous errors reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
a: (PROGN
(I haven't tried to investigate this bug enough to guess whether
there might be any user-level symptoms.)
+ In fact, the type system is likely to depend on this inequality not
+ holding... * is not equivalent to T in many cases, such as
+ (VECTOR *) /= (VECTOR T).
+
94a:
Inconsistencies between derived and declared VALUES return types for
DEFUN aren't checked very well. E.g. the logic which successfully
but actual specification quoted above says that the actual behavior
is undefined.
+ (Since 0.7.8.23 macroexpanders are defined in a restricted version
+ of the lexical environment, containing no lexical variables and
+ functions, which seems to conform to ANSI and CLtL2, but signalling
+ a STYLE-WARNING for references to variables similar to locals might
+ be a good thing.)
+
125:
(as reported by Gabe Garza on cmucl-help 2001-09-21)
(defvar *tmp* 3)
This situation may appear during optimizing away degenerate cases of
certain functions: see bugs 54, 192b.
-204:
- (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL) ...) inside MACROLET evaluates its
- argument in the null lexical environment. E.g. compiling file with
-
- (macrolet ((def (x) `(print ,x)))
- (eval-when (:compile-toplevel)
- (def 'hello)))
-
- causes
-
- debugger invoked on condition of type UNDEFINED-FUNCTION:
- The function DEF is undefined.
+205: "environment issues in cross compiler"
+ (These bugs have no impact on user code, but should be fixed or
+ documented.)
+ a. Macroexpanders introduced with MACROLET are defined in the null
+ lexical environment.
+ b. The body of (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL) ...) is evaluated in
+ the null lexical environment.
+
+206: ":SB-FLUID feature broken"
+ (reported by Antonio Martinez-Shotton sbcl-devel 2002-10-07)
+ Enabling :SB-FLUID in the target-features list in sbcl-0.7.8 breaks
+ the build.
+
+207: "poorly distributed SXHASH results for compound data"
+ SBCL's SXHASH could probably try a little harder. ANSI: "the
+ intent is that an implementation should make a good-faith
+ effort to produce hash-codes that are well distributed
+ within the range of non-negative fixnums". But
+ (let ((hits (make-hash-table)))
+ (dotimes (i 16)
+ (dotimes (j 16)
+ (let* ((ij (cons i j))
+ (newlist (push ij (gethash (sxhash ij) hits))))
+ (when (cdr newlist)
+ (format t "~&collision: ~S~%" newlist))))))
+ reports lots of collisions in sbcl-0.7.8. A stronger MIX function
+ would be an obvious way of fix. Maybe it would be acceptably efficient
+ to redo MIX using a lookup into a 256-entry s-box containing
+ 29-bit pseudorandom numbers?
+
+208: "package confusion in PCL handling of structure slot handlers"
+ In sbcl-0.7.8 compiling and loading
+ (in-package :cl)
+ (defstruct foo (slot (error "missing")) :type list :read-only t)
+ (defmethod print-object ((foo foo) stream) (print nil stream))
+ causes CERROR "attempting to modify a symbol in the COMMON-LISP
+ package: FOO-SLOT". (This is fairly bad code, but still it's hard
+ to see that it should cause symbols to be interned in the CL package.)
+
+209: "DOCUMENTATION generic function has wrong argument precedence order"
+ (fixed in sbcl-0.7.8.39)
+
+210: "unsafe evaluation of DEFSTRUCT slot initforms in BOA constructors"
+ (fixed in sbcl-0.7.8.35)
+
+211: "keywords processing"
+ a. :ALLOW-OTHER-KEYS T should allow a function to receive an odd
+ number of keyword arguments.
+ e. Compiling
+
+ (flet ((foo (&key y) (list y)))
+ (list (foo :y 1 :y 2)))
+
+ issues confusing message
+
+ ; in: LAMBDA NIL
+ ; (FOO :Y 1 :Y 2)
+ ;
+ ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
+ ; The variable #:G15 is defined but never used.
+
+
+212: "Sequence functions and circular arguments"
+ COERCE, MERGE and CONCATENATE go into an infinite loop when given
+ circular arguments; it would be good for the user if they could be
+ given an error instead (ANSI 17.1.1 allows this behaviour on the part
+ of the implementation, as conforming code cannot give non-proper
+ sequences to these functions. MAP also has this problem (and
+ solution), though arguably the convenience of being able to do
+ (MAP 'LIST '+ FOO '#1=(1 . #1#))
+ might be classed as more important (though signalling an error when
+ all of the arguments are circular is probably desireable).
+
+213: "Sequence functions and type checking"
+ a. MAKE-SEQUENCE, COERCE, MERGE and CONCATENATE cannot deal with
+ various complicated, though recognizeable, CONS types [e.g.
+ (CONS * (CONS * NULL))
+ which according to ANSI should be recognized] (and, in SAFETY 3
+ code, should return a list of LENGTH 2 or signal an error)
+ b. MAP, when given a type argument that is SUBTYPEP LIST, does not
+ check that it will return a sequence of the given type. Fixing
+ it along the same lines as the others (cf. work done around
+ sbcl-0.7.8.45) is possible, but doing so efficiently didn't look
+ entirely straightforward.
+ c. All of these functions will silently accept a type of the form
+ (CONS INTEGER *)
+ whether or not the return value is of this type. This is
+ probably permitted by ANSI (see "Exceptional Situations" under
+ ANSI MAKE-SEQUENCE), but the DERIVE-TYPE mechanism does not
+ know about this escape clause, so code of the form
+ (INTEGERP (CAR (MAKE-SEQUENCE '(CONS INTEGER *) 2)))
+ can erroneously return T.
+
+214:
+ SBCL 0.6.12.43 fails to compile
+
+ (locally
+ (declare (optimize (inhibit-warnings 0) (compilation-speed 2)))
+ (flet ((foo (&key (x :vx x-p)) (list x x-p)))
+ (foo 1 2)))
+
+ or a more simple example:
+
+ (locally
+ (declare (optimize (inhibit-warnings 0) (compilation-speed 2)))
+ (lambda (x) (declare (fixnum x)) (if (< x 0) 0 (1- x))))
+
+215: ":TEST-NOT handling by functions"
+ a. FIND and POSITION currently signal errors when given non-NIL for
+ both their :TEST and (deprecated) :TEST-NOT arguments, but by
+ ANSI 17.2 "the consequences are unspecified", which by ANSI 1.4.2
+ means that the effect is "unpredictable but harmless. It's not
+ clear what that actually means; it may preclude conforming
+ implementations from signalling errors.
+ b. COUNT, REMOVE and the like give priority to a :TEST-NOT argument
+ when conflict occurs. As a quality of implementation issue, it
+ might be preferable to treat :TEST and :TEST-NOT as being in some
+ sense the same &KEY, and effectively take the first test function in
+ the argument list.
+ c. Again, a quality of implementation issue: it would be good to issue a
+ STYLE-WARNING at compile-time for calls with :TEST-NOT, and a
+ WARNING for calls with both :TEST and :TEST-NOT; possibly this
+ latter should be WARNed about at execute-time too.
+
+216: "debugger confused by frames with invalid number of arguments"
+ In sbcl-0.7.8.51, executing e.g. (VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND T), BACKTRACE, Q
+ leaves the system confused, enough so that (QUIT) no longer works.
+ It's as though the process of working with the uninitialized slot in
+ the bad VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND frame causes GC problems, though that may
+ not be the actual problem. (CMU CL 18c doesn't have problems with this.)
+
+217:
+ In sbcl.0.7.7:
+
+ * (values-type-union (specifier-type '(function (base-char)))
+ (specifier-type '(function (integer))))
+
+ #<FUN-TYPE (FUNCTION (BASE-CHAR) *)>
DEFUNCT CATEGORIES OF BUGS